From: clayton stirling bartholomew (c.s.bartholomew@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Wed Dec 17 1997 - 18:33:22 EST
I don't think this Bartholomew ever gets it right the first time:
Bartholomew wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
R. H. Charles reconstructed the text in the same manner as it appears in the
text now received by all. I would take this to indicate that R. H. Charles
probably had some influence on the "Committee" or the "Gang of Five."
R. H. Charles reconstruction reads:
EI TIS EIS AICMALWSIAN
EIS AICMALWSIAN hUPAGEI
EI TIS EN MACAIRHi APOKTANQHNAI
AUTON EN MACAIRHi APOKTANQHNAI
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong wrong wrong. First off, R. H. Charles didn't reconstruct the text, he
just let the text of A stand. The "Gang of Five" didn't need to follow Charles
on this because they just let the text of A stand as well.
Bartholomew blundered here because he expected R. H. Charles to reconstruct
the text simply because that is what one learns to expect from R. H. Charles.
-- Clayton Stirling Bartholomew Three Tree Point P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:40 EDT